1818 replies to this topic

[shadowhawk]

TOP TEN MYTHS ON CHRISTS RESURRECTION.  evidence

 

http://www.risenjesu...us-resurrection

 

 

[addx]

Notice the X ray quality of the image.  The hands show the bones.
 
 

I don't really see an x-ray quality to the image.

The hip bones and thy bones for example are practically invisible even though they are the thickest bones of a human. It seems that the distance from the cloth and cloth "pressure" had the decisive role in the impression "depth". Since the cloth contains the entire image unskewed it means a radiation source had to be a panel like source emanating from under the body, which would accentuate the mentioned thick bones, not hide them. If the radiation source were a point from somewhere within Jesuses body, it would not create a perfect image on the cloth, it would look like a stain if anything. If we imagine that the radiation source was from within the jesus but still a plane like form going through the middle of jesus, that might explain why back bones and hip bones are missing, but then leg bones should be missing too and they're not. It seems hard to call this a radiation stain.

It clearly looks like a corpse that was covered with a cloth. The image might have been formed by a long chemical reaction of his sweat and bacteria. It might have been caused by the rotting process going underneath the cloth in touch with it. The picture clearly shows a pattern of something being covered with a cloth leaving a STAIN, there is nothing at all to implicate any kind of radiation or X-rays.

Edited by addx, 26 May 2014 - 11:08 PM.

[shadowhawk]

Scientists have examined the Shroud and discounted all those views.  No one knows, after decades, how the image was formed.  It does have an Xray quality and the bones of the hands show through.  That is why His fingers look so long.

[addx]

Scientists have examined the Shroud and discounted all those views.  No one knows, after decades, how the image was formed.  It does have an Xray quality and the bones of the hands show through.  That is why His fingers look so long.

It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse.


You just want to believe and some people have a way of presenting cherry picked facts and quasi scientists to make it believable. And some people then make a habit of watching cherry picked materials that make you seem very smart and opinionated about some controversial topic giving you self esteem that you need but with false knowledge. You're not really investing into scientific understanding of things. You're just listening to persuasive lectures of philosophers and quasi scientists. None of the crap you quote here is actually understood by you. You just learned to impersonate the scientific importance of these "non-facts" that the persuasive liars you listen to impress on you in a stream of creatively connected "non-facts", revealing a trip down the rabbit hole of special knowledge for you to unveil to unsuspecting victims even on this forum. You're a gullible fool thinking you can simply find the right knowledge and that right knowledge is even told in such a desperate brainwashing way.

[serp777]

The shroud still proves nothing about Christianity

[Castiel]

Evidence they were not eyewitnesses.   The New testament was written in Greek.  This is a translation but it says the same thing.  You obviously don t understand how translation works.  Google the Bible in different translation.

 

vote

 

ALL translations in that page I gave, about half a dozen to a dozen, show Jesus is told he is good and he responds that why do they call him good because only God is good.   So we can easily assume that is what the original text likely says.

 

As for eyewitnesses.
?  How about the accepted evidence that some of the latter are based on the preceding ones? 

 

• Mark: c. 68–73,^[35] c. 65–70.^[36]

• Matthew: c. 70–100,^[35] c. 80–85.^[36]

• Luke: c. 80–100, with most arguing for somewhere around 85,^[35] c. 80–85.^[36]

• John: c. 90–100,^[36] c. 90–110,^[37] The majority view is that it was written in stages, so there was no one date of composition.

wiki majority accepted dating

 

If this dating is correct it would be exceptionally old people if actual witnesses, as they were full adults at the time of Jesus around 30 a.d., that said it is likelier that as many have considered these were accounts from people who do not bear the name of the gospels.

 

THERE IS ALSO OBVIOUS EVIDENCE THEY WERE NOT DIRECT WITNESSES TO THINGS SUCH AS THE NATIVITY.  NOR WERE THEY LIKELY DIRECT WITNESSES OF THE SUPPOSED EMPTY TOMB EVENT.

 

 

All those people that came and died before Jesus was even on earth, countless generations, tens of thousands of years.   Why not wait a few millenia for technology to arrive to properly document the miracles?  Why did it need to be obscure myth prone superstitious past? We are told from those of faith, that this was so that we required GREAT FAITH in order to believe on such scant and nebulous testimony, because faith is a virtue.   ACTUALLY THE LESS EVIDENCE YOU HAVE AND STRONGER your faith the more VIRTUOUS YOU ARE, especially if you go to church and make sure to give some money to it.

Edited by Castiel, 27 May 2014 - 01:58 AM.

[Castiel]

 

What appears most revealing of all, comes not from what people later wrote about Jesus but what people did not write about him. Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!

 

If, indeed, the Gospels portray a historical look at the life of Jesus, then the one feature that stands out prominently within the stories shows that people claimed to know Jesus far and wide, not only by a great multitude of followers but by the great priests, the Roman governor Pilate, and Herod who claims that he had heard "of the fame of Jesus" (Matt 14:1)". One need only read Matt: 4:25 where it claims that "there followed him [Jesus] great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordan." The gospels mention, countless times, the great multitude that followed Jesus and crowds of people who congregated to hear him. So crowded had some of these gatherings grown, that Luke 12:1 alleges that an "innumerable multitude of people... trode one upon another." Luke 5:15 says that there grew "a fame abroad of him: and great multitudes came together to hear..." The persecution of Jesus in Jerusalem drew so much attention that all the chief priests and scribes, including the high priest Caiaphas, not only knew about him but helped in his alleged crucifixion. (see Matt 21:15-23, 26:3, Luke 19:47, 23:13). The multitude of people thought of Jesus, not only as a teacher and a miracle healer, but a prophet (see Matt:14:5).

 

So here we have the gospels portraying Jesus as famous far and wide, a prophet and healer, with great multitudes of people who knew about him, including the greatest Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities of the area, and not one person records his existence during his lifetime? If the poor, the rich, the rulers, the highest priests, and the scribes knew about Jesus, who would not have heard of him?

 

Then we have a particular astronomical event that would have attracted the attention of anyone interested in the "heavens." According to Luke 23:44-45, there occurred "about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour, and the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst." Yet not a single mention of such a three hour ecliptic event got recorded by anyone, including the astronomers and astrologers, anywhere in the world, including Pliny the Elder and Seneca who both recorded eclipses from other dates. Note also that, for obvious reasons, solar eclipses can't occur during a full moon (passovers always occur during full moons), Nor does a single contemporary person write about the earthquake described in Matthew 27:51-54 where the earth shook, rocks ripped apart (rent), and graves opened.

 

All four gospels are anonymous texts. The familiar attributions of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John come from the mid-second century and later and we have no good historical reason to accept these attributions.

-Steve Mason, professor of classics, history and religious studies at York University in Toronto (Bible Review, Feb. 2000, p. 36)

-http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

Let's also remember that events such as the NATIVITY were NOT WRITTEN DOWN BY ANY DIRECT WITNESS it is only hearsay and with supernatural elements to boot.

[shadowhawk]

They called Jesus Good and Jesus said, Only God is good.  Hello

[Castiel]

They called Jesus Good and Jesus said, Only God is good.  Hello

 

but why ALSO respond with the question why do you call me good?

 

That is if they told him you're good and he said I know only God is good, it might sound strange but acceptable.   But responding with such a question suggest it is not appropriate to call him good and the reason why not follows because it is only God that is good not him.

[addx]

They called Jesus Good and Jesus said, Only God is good.  Hello

 
but why ALSO respond with the question why do you call me good?
 
That is if they told him you're good and he said I know only God is good, it might sound strange but acceptable.   But responding with such a question suggest it is not appropriate to call him good and the reason why not follows because it is only God that is good not him.

I'm sure this situation actually stems from borderline selftorture of Jesus.

[shadowhawk]

addx:  You just learned to impersonate the scientific importance of these "non-facts" that the persuasive liars you listen to impress on you in a stream of creatively connected "non-facts", revealing a trip down the rabbit hole of special knowledge for you to unveil to unsuspecting victims even on this forum. You're a gullible fool thinking you can simply find the right knowledge and that right knowledge is even told in such a desperate brainwashing way.

Perhaps the Xray quality is not obvious to addx and five year olds as he claims but it is often noted bu the top Scientists who studied it and were not all Christians.  Things that appear on the image, such as the extra long fingers are the bones in the fleshey part of the hand.  This same effect has been shown with X-ray pictures of hands by scientists.

Calling the scientists names is not evidence but it is usual from addx.  Here is the evidence.

The image http://www.longecity...-34#entry664607
 

[addx]

addx:  You just learned to impersonate the scientific importance of these "non-facts" that the persuasive liars you listen to impress on you in a stream of creatively connected "non-facts", revealing a trip down the rabbit hole of special knowledge for you to unveil to unsuspecting victims even on this forum. You're a gullible fool thinking you can simply find the right knowledge and that right knowledge is even told in such a desperate brainwashing way.

Perhaps the Xray quality is not obvious to addx and five year olds as he claims but it is often noted bu the top Scientists who studied it and were not all Christians.  Things that appear on the image, such as the extra long fingers are the bones in the fleshey part of the hand.  This same effect has been shown with X-ray pictures of hands by scientists.

Calling the scientists names is not evidence but it is usual from addx.  Here is the evidence.

The image http://www.longecity...-34#entry664607

They found that, unlike any photograph they had analyzed, the shroud image has the property of decoding into a 3-dimensional image, when the darker parts of the image are interpreted to be those features of the man that were closest to the shroud and the lighter areas of the image those features that were farthest.

Exactly as I said it.

http://en.wikipedia....Shroud_of_Turin

[shadowhawk]

This is off topic here and I am going to finish the topic of the Shroud but the question of Christs claim of Divinity has been brought up with a quote from Mark 10:18
New International Version
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.

The contest is:
The Rich Young Man
17As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 18And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 19"You know the commandments, 'DO NOT MURDER, DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, DO NOT STEAL, DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, Do not defraud, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER.'"…

John 11:25-26 says
I AM the resurrection and the life, who believes in ME will live (eternally), even though he dies (physically); and whoever lives and believes in me will never die (spiritually)
John 10:28 says,
I will give them eternal life and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.

So the Rich Young asked how do I get eternal Life?  Sounds like a question here at Longecity.  The answer came back Only the Good God God can give you eternal life.  It is an issue of faith.
Other Gospels record this same event.
Matthew 19:17 And he said to him, Why call you me good? there is none good but …

Luke 18:19 And Jesus said to him, Why call you me good? none is good, save one, …

While some such as Castiel, have suggested that Christ's question contradicts the orthodox view that He was God incarnate, the opposite is actually the case (see Other Views Considered, below).  Jesus is forcing the young ruler to face the implications of calling Jesus "good," not only with regard to Jesus' goodness, but also with regard to his own.  The young ruler shows himself to be "good" by every human test - he is devoted to keeping the Law.  His fellow Jews considered his wealth to be another measure of his goodness.  However, Jesus' pointed question here and His command that the young ruler renounce his wealth and follow Him (10:21) reveal that human standards of goodness are not God's.

The first commandment of the Law is to place God first in one's life and to love Him completely.  The young ruler "went away sad" (10:22) because he realized that though he had devoted himself to keeping the other commandments, he had failed to keep the first.  His riches meant more to him than God did, and thus he was not "good" in the eyes of God.  It is important to note that Jesus' pointed remarks were motivated by love, a correction of the sole "lack" in the young man's devotion.

Thus, Jesus' fundamental lesson is that "goodness" flows not from men's deeds, or even their sincere attempt to keep the Law, but rather must have another source - God Himself.  In this context, Jesus' request  to "follow Me" is the equivalent of doing good by God's standard.  Jesus encourages the young ruler to give up his wealth and put God first by following Him.  

We will address the Trinity next.

[shadowhawk]

addx: Exactly as I said it.

No, you said,
It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse.
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665039

It in fact is not a contact image at all as the scientific studies show.  I wish you would think before you talk.
 

[addx]

addx: Exactly as I said it.

No, you said,
It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse.
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665039

It in fact is not a contact image at all as the scientific studies show.  I wish you would think before you talk.

The second sentence I ever wrote about the shroud still on this page states:

"It seems that the distance from the cloth and cloth "pressure" had the decisive role in the impression "depth".

The quote from wiki states:

"the darker parts of the image are interpreted to be those features of the man that were closest to the shroud and the lighter areas of the image those features that were farthest."




You're a clown.

[shadowhawk]

 

 

addx: Exactly as I said it.

No, you said,
It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse.
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665039

It in fact is not a contact image at all as the scientific studies show.  I wish you would think before you talk.

 

The second sentence I ever wrote about the shroud still on this page states:

"It seems that the distance from the cloth and cloth "pressure" had the decisive role in the impression "depth".

The quote from wiki states:

"the darker parts of the image are interpreted to be those features of the man that were closest to the shroud and the lighter areas of the image those features that were farthest."




You're a clown.

 

 

Again, you said, "It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse" and then you quote wikik as if it is saying the same thing.  Wow!!!  It is not saying the same thing!  The only thing that shows direct contact with the Shroud is the blood which soaked through the cloth.  How the image got there no one has been able to figure out after decades of scientific study.  And then you finish off with your normal ad homenom. 
 

Edited by shadowhawk, 29 May 2014 - 10:37 PM.

[Castiel]

This is off topic here and I am going to finish the topic of the Shroud but the question of Christs claim of Divinity has been brought up with a quote from Mark 10:18
New International Version
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.

The contest is:
The Rich Young Man
17As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 18And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 19"You know the commandments, 'DO NOT MURDER, DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, DO NOT STEAL, DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, Do not defraud, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER.'"…

John 11:25-26 says
I AM the resurrection and the life, who believes in ME will live (eternally), even though he dies (physically); and whoever lives and believes in me will never die (spiritually)
John 10:28 says,
I will give them eternal life and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.

So the Rich Young asked how do I get eternal Life?  Sounds like a question here at Longecity.  The answer came back Only the Good God God can give you eternal life.  It is an issue of faith.
Other Gospels record this same event.
Matthew 19:17 And he said to him, Why call you me good? there is none good but …

Luke 18:19 And Jesus said to him, Why call you me good? none is good, save one, …

While some such as Castiel, have suggested that Christ's question contradicts the orthodox view that He was God incarnate, the opposite is actually the case (see Other Views Considered, below).  Jesus is forcing the young ruler to face the implications of calling Jesus "good," not only with regard to Jesus' goodness, but also with regard to his own.  The young ruler shows himself to be "good" by every human test - he is devoted to keeping the Law.  His fellow Jews considered his wealth to be another measure of his goodness.  However, Jesus' pointed question here and His command that the young ruler renounce his wealth and follow Him (10:21) reveal that human standards of goodness are not God's.

The first commandment of the Law is to place God first in one's life and to love Him completely.  The young ruler "went away sad" (10:22) because he realized that though he had devoted himself to keeping the other commandments, he had failed to keep the first.  His riches meant more to him than God did, and thus he was not "good" in the eyes of God.  It is important to note that Jesus' pointed remarks were motivated by love, a correction of the sole "lack" in the young man's devotion.

Thus, Jesus' fundamental lesson is that "goodness" flows not from men's deeds, or even their sincere attempt to keep the Law, but rather must have another source - God Himself.  In this context, Jesus' request  to "follow Me" is the equivalent of doing good by God's standard.  Jesus encourages the young ruler to give up his wealth and put God first by following Him.  

We will address the Trinity next.

 

 why are you quoting John when the quote is from mark?
The claim is that the legend was aggrandized as the decades went by and the latter gospels were written.   They simply copied the story and added to it.  Unless Jesus himself states I'm God incarnate worship me in some place in say Mark it is suspicious to infer godhood from later texts also:

 

"My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?"

'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

Clearly if he is God he can't abandon himself, it is nonsensical.  Attempts to reconcile this as him quoting the bible, don't even make sense.
 

[shadowhawk]

If I was going to quote the earliest part of the Bible on the subject of the deity of Christ it would be this.  Both are earlier than Mark.  However I make no apology for building the doctrine of Christ on the full Bible because it is what earliest Christianity believes.  The earliest writings in the New testament are the writings of Paul, not Mark as I said.  I Corinthians goes back to one or two years after the death of Christ.  Paul writes:  I Cor. 15:1-7
“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”

later Paul describes How Christ became man:  Phil. 2:6-11: “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. “

Paul received these teachings from the apostles themselves.  These were songs. These are the earliest sources sang by the Church.  The early Church believed in the Trinity.  I could quote other verses to flesh this out but I am slicking with the earliest.  Christians started singing songs about Christ even before His death and these early song became the very earliest creeds.  There are quite a few of them in the Biblical text.  We are getting ahead of ourselves because I am going to finish the Shroud.

[platypus]

 

Again, you said, "It does not have an X-ray quality, it is obvious to a 5 year old. The pattern exactly matches the contact pressure between the cloth and the corpse" and then you quote wikik as if it is saying the same thing.  Wow!!!  It is not saying the same thing!  The only thing that shows direct contact with the Shroud is the blood which soaked through the cloth.  How the image got there no one has been able to figure out after decades of scientific study.  And then you finish off with your normal ad homenom. 

But of course it matches the contact-pressure between the cloth and the corpse - how else would they have made the shroud with the technology they had?? It would be a MIRACLE if it had a type of imprinting that would have been impossible with the available technologies. 

[addx]

Shadowhank, this is my post, is not not?

Notice the X ray quality of the image.  The hands show the bones.
 
 

I don't really see an x-ray quality to the image.

The hip bones and thy bones for example are practically invisible even though they are the thickest bones of a human. It seems that the distance from the cloth and cloth "pressure" had the decisive role in the impression "depth". Since the cloth contains the entire image unskewed it means a radiation source had to be a panel like source emanating from under the body, which would accentuate the mentioned thick bones, not hide them. If the radiation source were a point from somewhere within Jesuses body, it would not create a perfect image on the cloth, it would look like a stain if anything. If we imagine that the radiation source was from within the jesus but still a plane like form going through the middle of jesus, that might explain why back bones and hip bones are missing, but then leg bones should be missing too and they're not. It seems hard to call this a radiation stain.

It clearly looks like a corpse that was covered with a cloth. The image might have been formed by a long chemical reaction of his sweat and bacteria. It might have been caused by the rotting process going underneath the cloth in touch with it. The picture clearly shows a pattern of something being covered with a cloth leaving a STAIN, there is nothing at all to implicate any kind of radiation or X-rays.

The bold sentence is mine is not?

Wiki says:

when the darker parts of the image are interpreted to be those features of the man that were closest to the shroud and the lighter areas of the image those features that were farthest.

Liar

[shadowhawk]

addx: Liar.

Name calling seems to e all you do.  Read YOUR quote again where YOU speak of the contact pressure between the cloth and the body.  Well enough of this. 

FURTHER STUDY SOURCES ON THE RESURRECTION

The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God, by NT Wright
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach’ by Mike Licona
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, by Gary R Habermas and Mike Licona
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
Paul Meets Muhammad: A Christian-Muslim Debate on the Resurrection, by Michael Licona and Lee Strobel
Did Jesus Rise From the Dead (3 debates on 3 DVD's) Michael Licona vs Dan Barker
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
The Resurrection of Jesus: Authority & Method in Theology, by Mike Licona
http://www.amazon.co...rds=Mike Licona
The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus , by Lee Strobel
http://www.amazon.co...ction of Christ
Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?, Debate  William Lane Craig vs. Bart D. Ehrman
http://www.reasonabl...he-craig-ehrman
Resurrection-of-Jesus Research, by Gary R Habermas
http://www.garyhabermas.com/
Is There Scientific Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ? By Jerry Newcombe
http://www.christian...s-christ-72677/
 

[shadowhawk]

THE FIRST SECTION SUMMAEY, IS THERE A GOD?  Post 601
http://www.longecity...600#entry647448
============================================
WHICH GOD? SECTION TWO SUMMARY post 780
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657878
=================================================================
CASE FOR CHRISTIANITY AND CHRIST–SECTION THREE
=================================================================
WHAT IS FAITH?
http://www.longecity...-24#entry655255
http://www.longecity...-26#entry656730
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662201
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663167
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663899
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663923
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663927
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663928

PASSOVER, JEWISH BASIS FOR CHRISTIANITY.
http://www.longecity...-25#entry656295

THE EASTER RESURRECTION
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657069
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657647
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657800
Good Friday, other sources as evidence.
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657142

WAS CHRIST THE ONLY GOD TO HAVE RISEN FROM THE DEAD?
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657554

WHICH GOD SUMMARY, SECTION ONE AND TWO.post 780
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657878

PART THREE, EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY post 781
Sweating blood
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658023
Jesus’s wounds on cross
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658217

WHY DID JESUS DIE QUICKLY?  Post 789
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658283

THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658516

TIMELINE OF THE WEEK OF THE PASSOVER FEAST.
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658553

THE JANISSARIES - ISLAM aside, off topic.  Post 799
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658679
http://www.longecity...-28#entry659155

WHERE IS HISTORY GOING, HISTORY AS PROOF,
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658684

EVIDENCE SO FAR FOR THE RESURRECTION PRESENTED SUMMARY, post 808
http://www.longecity...-27#entry659099
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664992
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH TO THE EVIDENCE ppst 815
http://www.longecity...-28#entry659385
http://www.longecity...-28#entry659570
FACT #1?THE DEATH OF JESUS BY CRUCIFIXION post 818
http://www.longecity...-28#entry659738
FACT #2?THE EMPTY TOMB
http://www.longecity...-28#entry659943
FACT #3?THE POST-RESURRECTION APPEARANCES post 826
http://www.longecity...-28#entry660241
FACT #4?THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH post 842
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660568
SUMMARY
THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH TO THE EVIDENCE post 843
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660574
CONCLUSION AND FOOTNOTES TO MINIMAL FACTS post 846
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660591
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOME EXTRA BIBLICAL SOURCES FROM COLD CASE CHRISTIANITY post 837
http://www.longecity...-28#entry660468
Some More Evidence for the Resurrection by Josh McDowell
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660619
EARLY CHRISTIAN non biblical HISTORICAL EVIDENCE post 850
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660772
IS THE BIBLE ALSO EVIDENCE?
http://www.longecity...-29#entry660945
THE MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE post 858
http://www.longecity...-29#entry661148
http://www.longecity...-29#entry661163
----------
THE SHROUD OF CHRIST
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662221
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663132
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663540
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663544
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664455
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664599
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664607
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664650
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664992

What color was Christ
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662282
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662369
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662374
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662408
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662439
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664599

Christ Pantocrator from St. Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai, Egypt.
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662369
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662435
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662439
http://www.longecity...-31#entry662677
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664443
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664453
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664455
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664599

Face of Jesus off Shroud
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662440
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662595
http://www.longecity...-31#entry662906

Did Jesus claim to be God?  Did he claim to be a man?
http://www.longecity...-30#entry662442

Why Is the Shroud of Turin evidence?
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663135
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663154
http://www.longecity...-31#entry663155
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664607
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664808
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664992

THE SUDARIUM of OVIEDO:
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663730
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663913

BIBLICAL EVIDENCE FOR SHROUD
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663921
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663938
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663942
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663952
http://www.longecity...-32#entry663960
http://www.longecity...-33#entry663972
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664033
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664179
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664260
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664378
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665055
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665173

JESUS, THE SHROUD AND LONG HAIR
http://www.longecity...-33#entry663991
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664014
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664386
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664434
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664443
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664453
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664455
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664599

What is the history of the Shroud of Turin?
http://www.longecity...-33#entry664470
http://www.longecity...-34#entry664607


to post 1040
 

[addx]

Why does it take so much evidence for you to believe in God?

[shadowhawk]

Why does it take so much evidence for you to believe in God?

It doesn't a child can believe.  We all live by faith.

 

[addx]

Why does it take so much evidence for you to believe in God?

It doesn't a child can believe.  We all live by faith.

Why have you collected so much evidence then?

[shadowhawk]

 

 

Why does it take so much evidence for you to believe in God?

It doesn't a child can believe.  We all live by faith.

 

Why have you collected so much evidence then?

 

Because I am not a Child.

[Castiel]

If I was going to quote the earliest part of the Bible on the subject of the deity of Christ it would be this.  Both are earlier than Mark.  However I make no apology for building the doctrine of Christ on the full Bible because it is what earliest Christianity believes.  The earliest writings in the New testament are the writings of Paul, not Mark as I said.  I Corinthians goes back to one or two years after the death of Christ.  Paul writes:  I Cor. 15:1-7
“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”

later Paul describes How Christ became man:  Phil. 2:6-11: “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. “

Paul received these teachings from the apostles themselves.  These were songs. These are the earliest sources sang by the Church.  The early Church believed in the Trinity.  I could quote other verses to flesh this out but I am slicking with the earliest.  Christians started singing songs about Christ even before His death and these early song became the very earliest creeds.  There are quite a few of them in the Biblical text.  We are getting ahead of ourselves because I am going to finish the Shroud.

 

Intriguing but the timing of that is near mark especially the second one.  The first one does not attest to divinity[merely to resurrectioh] while the second does. 

 

Still an entity that asks "why they call them good because only god is good", prays to god, and says that god has abandoned them does not seem that godly.   When you take into the fact that AT LEAST SOME OF THE SO CALLED OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECIES are not prophecies at all but random quoting out of context things become flimsier.   ADD TO THAT THAT IT APPEARS THE GOD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IS FICTION(no noah, no adam, no eve, and some say even no exodus).   AND WHAT DO YOU CALL A MAN WHO IS BOTH MAN AND FICTIONAL GOD? A simple lunatic, probably homeless and insane

 

New International Version
When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

New Living Translation
When his family heard what was happening, they tried to take him away. "He's out of his mind," they said.

English Standard Version
And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for they were saying, “He is out of his mind.”

New American Standard Bible
When His own people heard of this, they went out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, "He has lost His senses."

MARK 3:21

 

Like today where hundreds and even thousands of followers surround the founder of a cult and attest to being witnesses to untold miracles.   Jesus was nothing more than an apocalyptic prophet, a failed one at that, like many that came before and since, yet due to roman meddling this cult became a worldwide phenomenon.    Yet it is slowly dying, rotting away, because the moment the god of the old testament, that brutal hateful dictactor constantly changing his mind while mercilessly killing as well as ordering the killing of thousands while implicitly ordering lifelong rape sentences upon innocent women, yes the abomination of the old testament, whose own words appear to be of a deranged psychotic dictactor overjoyed with the abuse of power... the moment this creature dies in the mind of the believers and becomes fiction, the new testament and its random quotations of old testament as justification for existence becomes nothing more than a JOKE.

 

 

While traveling in India, I encountered several cults who attributed astonishing miracles to their leaders. Should we accept those cults by such evidence? (1:13)-http://bahaitext.inf...es&tgt=0&wds=xx

 

As said if i claim that I'm the incarnation of the god of the lord of the rings, and have countless followers attesting to my countless miracles.... guess what? Their testimony is worth nothing, and fiction is fiction you can't be part fiction.

[addx]

Why does it take so much evidence for you to believe in God?

It doesn't a child can believe.  We all live by faith.

Why have you collected so much evidence then?

Because I am not a Child.

So it takes adults all this evidence to believe?

Edited by addx, 31 May 2014 - 12:41 PM.

[shadowhawk]

addx: So it takes adults all this evidence to believe?

 

No but as you grow you learn if you have an open and curious mind.

[shadowhawk]

THE TRINITY evidence.

We have seen a bit of evidence for Christianity so far.  
Here are some resources to study for the serious.
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665825
Here Is the evidence so far.
http://www.longecity...-35#entry665859

We started out with the Resurrection of Christ because If someone could rise from the dead and be seen by hundreds at various times in the post resurrection appearances, that should cause us to pay attention, Miracles are called, “signs” in the scriptures.  Pay attention.  This is the way.

The Trinity is hard for us to understand because God is beyond our understanding.  If this was not so, then our minds would be greater than God.  But, that does not keep us from trying and we can know some things partially.  So lets start with the basic idea of the Trinity.  How far can reason take us?




 

Edited by shadowhawk, 31 May 2014 - 07:58 PM.